View Poll Results: Is this CORPORATE WELFARE?

Voters
9. You may not vote on this poll
  • YES

    7 77.78%
  • NO

    2 22.22%
  • OTHER (please explain)

    0 0%
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 33 of 33

Thread: Is this Corporate Welfare?

  1. #31
    Light△Bender

    grip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    ☚ ☛
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:32 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,186
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Is this Corporate Welfare?

    Quote Originally Posted by BobJam View Post
    So are you saying that government messing with the Renewable Energy biz is a legitimate function of government?

    While some may view it as a "necessary" function, there's a big difference between "necessary" and "legitimate".
    Sure, they broke up Standard Oil because it was too big and successful. You know a monopoly? The government subsidies farming, so prices stay stable. They recently bought car companies and bailed out banks and insurance companies. They protect strategic interests involving oil producing nations that sell us oil. Government is always getting involved in business.
    Einstein, "science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."

  2. #32
    Iconoclast
    DaveFagan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    wny
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:17 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,292

    Re: Is this Corporate Welfare?

    Quote Originally Posted by waas View Post
    It is.



    I can't fathom why you would think that. It's just the government providing some funds to help make us relevant in the global renewables market. It has little or no impact on the status quo.



    I suppose you're right about this, but it can be equally as effective in large scale generation.



    I don't think you understand corporate welfare. It's a process where the government artificially keeps private corporations afloat. This, well, is not.
    I'm saying the Renewables monies are hijacked by Corporations who fight change that could hurt their bottom lines. This money goes to COMMERCIAL applications for centralized distribution. The gov't will artificially keep these Corporations afloat at the expense of the taxpaying public. These monies should be spent attempting to de-centralize and the monopolistic powers of those entities prevent that. This is already a huge profit enterprise and does not require development with public monies. Use their own to maintain their monopolistic powers and not be subsidized by the taxpaying public. This Corporation is Lockheed Martin. We don't need more of the same, we need change.

  3. #33
    Iconoclast
    DaveFagan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    wny
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:17 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,292

    Re: Is this Corporate Welfare?

    Quote Originally Posted by grip View Post
    Sure, they broke up Standard Oil because it was too big and successful. You know a monopoly? The government subsidies farming, so prices stay stable. They recently bought car companies and bailed out banks and insurance companies. They protect strategic interests involving oil producing nations that sell us oil. Government is always getting involved in business.
    Absolutely correct.. Standard is Rockefeller's ExxonMobil today and also JPMorgan Chase because if you make really big money, you become a bank, and he was allowed to keep 20% of each of the other 7 sisters. The gov't subsidizes Farming and now we don't have small farms. Do you see a pattern emerging. Ah yes, gov't is always getting involved in business and somehow small business dies as a result. The gov't that is the best that money can buy is always bought with and by BIG MONEY. I like to emphasize the details.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •